The City of Santa Ana, in partnership with OCCORD, the Orange County Labor Federation, the Public Law Center and NALEO, is proud to present a FREE Citizenship Fair on Saturday, April 9th at the Southwest Center from 9 am to noon (2201 W McFadden Ave, Santa Ana, CA 92704).

So you missed Larry Mantle’s “Santa Ana Gentrification Wars” radio show, that taped on Tuesday, March 29, at Libreria Martinez? Not to worry. Click here to hear the show, which was part of Mantle’s Air Talk program.

Guests included:

Eric Altman, Executive Director of OCCORD, Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development, a labor-funded non-profit organization that is headed up by two white male executives.

Carlos Bustamante, Santa Ana Councilman – Ward 3; Director of Administration at Orange County Public Works

Carolina Sarmiento, member of the Centro Cultural de Mexico, a longtime Santa Ana nonprofit that figures into the gentrification game

Art Lomeli, a dentist who lives in Orange Park Acres and who heads up the Santa Ana Coalition for Better Government

Reviews were mixed. Apparently little was accomplished on this show.

The Voice of OC blog provided a recap, which indicated that a lot of the discussion on the show was about the failed attempt to force a so-called “Community Benefit Agreement” on the Station District redevelopment project, which was going to include affordable housing but was derailed by a lawsuit.

These “Community Benefit Agreements” are nothing more than extortion. They are attempts by folks who do not own property to force their will on developers. They usually fail as developers and city governments have no reason to sign on to their demands, which do not respect property rights.

Furthermore, these agreements are advanced by non-elected busy-bodies who have no mandate and really should have no say in what happens in our community. We already have an elected City Council. It is their job, along with our City Planning Commission and our Planning Department, to resolve these issues.

Here is what our reader Cook had to say about the program: “The book store was packed, must have been more than the 100 people limit. Nothing ground breaking happened, but there was a lot of exchanging ideas and talking points.”

And here is what our reader Junior had to say about it: “There were no NEW ideas – it was regurgitated talking points – from all sides.”

What did other folks think? Well, the comments left on Mantle’s blog are interesting, to wit:

From David: Thanks again for hosting such a great event. I was fortunately to be part of the crowd when AirTalk was being recorded.

A believe that the core question was not answered directly and that was whether these businesses are displacing the natives in the Downtown Santa Ana area. Granted the redevelopment is supposedly be bringing in affordable housing but economically, how many natives can afford housing even when it’s affordable?

When Larry Mantle had asked as to whether they couldn’t compare this project to other cities such as Santa Monica, I think a better example would have been a local city, such as Westminster.

Asian Americans have a strong community in the City of Westminster and have a strong ties to the local businesses in the area. There has been development projects in Westminster as well but they are definitely helping the community by allowing more local businesses to be developed without having to worry for big corporations. I don’t see why Santa Ana can’t follow this business plan.

From Delores: As a Heinz 57 mutt, I love the culture here in Santa Ana. I think most Anglos do. Sadly last night it sounded like Carolina was an apologist for her family’s weath and for living in Floral Park. She has the luxury of being a rich kid who never purchases in downtown and yet cries foul for the community. The truth is, the 80,000 people who live in the sphere of influence of downtown do not shop downtown they head to Target, WalMart and Main Place. Downtown no longer has the 2nd place tax base that Art referenced. That was 7 years ago. As Carlos stated; the whites didn’t want the browns in the 70’s and the browns do not want the whites in 2011. It wasn’t right then, and it’s not right now! Change is afoot. Not unlike Borders, it is survival of the fittest. If you offer good service, value and quality; bridal shop, jewelry store, clothing store, tax preparation, etc., you have nothing to worry about. If your business is being pushed out by the worldwide web (travel, CD’s, movies) you should change your product. The color of downtown is not red, yellow, black, brown or white; it is green Carolina. If it’s not green, who will pay for what you ask for? Who will pay for affordable housing, green space, community centers, healthcare, and on and on????? Developers aren’t standing in line waiting to get a project in Santa Ana. It’s the contrary, the City is courting these developers to please take a look at Santa Ana.

From Holly: As a former longtime resident, I have seen the city of Santa Ana persistently navigate major redevelopment projects over the last 25 years. I’m thinking of the Bristol Corridor Project, the Delhi Community Center Redevelopment and all of the Santa Ana Schools that have been built on former business locations throughout Santa Ana. There were many of these same concerns expressed very actively & effectively from the community then, too and the City heard them and incorporated their concerns. The desire for accessible shopping and parks, open space, affordable housing, safe neighborhoods and a good community center are not unique to just Ward 2 in Santa Ana. Which leads me to believe that perhaps, in these very trying economic times – that the community’s desire for the labor to be ‘only from Santa Ana’ and that it be ‘Union’ only, is one of the true sticking points. To which I would say: only the attorneys for and against the lawsuit will benefit. The community of Ward 2 of Santa Ana will continue to struggle and the Station Area redevelopment project will languish, not improving the situation for anyone. Anyone except the attorneys on both sides of the pending lawsuit, that is.

From Michael: Perhaps the close minded people who want to fight something thing that is met for the betterment of all the community, had better step back and think a little. Breaking the law has consequences, regardless of peoples national origin, race or creed. I was appaled at the comment of one Hispanic woman who said what about the undocumented people who don’t have a voice in this matter. Well the truth is they shouldn’t have any voice period. Break the laws of our country and pay the price without complaining. The second issue is what is called the right of imminant domain. Just remember the courts have always upheld this issue and if people do not want to move forward with a community betterment project, this law can be imposed on them. I am a native of Los Angeles and have watched as the once great and beautiful city of Santa Ana going down to where it has become like a third world city. I congratulate the city council in their vision to bring Santa Ana back to its rightful place in So Cal. It is a total waste of money and time as well as increases a projects cost immensily to bring a lawsuit and with the state of our economy, is there money to waste? I think not. The council and developer get my vote.

KPCC’s Larry Mantle is hosting a radio show about Santa Ana on March 28, at 6:30 p.m. You can get a free ticket by clicking here. Mantle’s program is entitled “Santa Ana’s Gentrification Wars.” KPCC Radio 89.3 is also known as National Public Radio NPR.

The show will run from 6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m., at Libreria Martinez, which is located at 216 North Broadway, in Santa Ana .

Does downtown Santa Ana need a face lift? The Santa Ana City Council has proposed multiple projects to upgrade housing and bring new business activity to the area. But some very vocal and active groups oppose this redevelopment. They argue that these changes will push out family owned businesses and negatively transform the character of downtown Santa Ana.

On March 15, AirTalk goes “on the road” to Libreria Martinez in Santa Ana to debate the pros and cons of that city’s revitalization process. Will the refurbishing of downtown Santa Ana improve or hurt the quality of life and well-being of residents there? Join Larry Mantle and guests for an in depth discussion about Santa Ana’s gentrification wars.

The public is invited to attend. ADMISSION IS FREE. But RSVPs are required.

Guests:

Eric Altman, Executive Director of OCCORD, Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development a community-based non-profit organization that advocates for the rights of Orange County’s working families

It is obvious that Mantle has no clue about Santa Ana. Our Downtown has already had a face lift! The project he is thinking of is likely the Station District, which has been derailed by a lawsuit. The land the city bought in that area was bought with grants for affordable housing. In fact the Station District included a lot of affordable housing.

OCCORD is a union-backed organization that is funded in part by Alfredo Amezcua, who lost badly last year when he challenged Mayor Miguel Pulido. It is ironic that they are focusing on gentrification when their top two executives are white males.

The reality is that our city has seen a huge influx in the last few years of Vietnamese Americans. At the same time many white residents have died or moved out. We are the most diverse city in Orange County – so arguing about gentrification seems rather silly.

―Now more than ever, we need economic development in Orange County, but people won’t support it if they lose confidence in the political process, said Robert Nothoff, OCCORD Policy Analyst and Rubber Stamp Process co-author. ―The planning process is broken: Communities don’t have an equal voice to counter special interests, and elected leaders are between a rock and a hard place as they look for ways to balance the budget.

Findings of The Rubber Stamp Process include:

Outside interests have disproportionate sway over local politics, as 70% of all individual and corporate political contributions in Anaheim and Santa Ana came from outside city boundaries.

The top five Economic Sectors (NAICS) accounted for 63% of overall contributions to successful Mayoral and City Council races, including several development-related sub-industries.

Local planning commissions do not represent every neighborhood or the general public as a whole. In Anaheim and Santa Ana, over half of all planning commissioners between 2000 – 2010 came from relatively affluent neighborhoods that represent less than 20% of the total population.

Development projects move forward even when the public strongly disagrees with them. In Anaheim and Santa Ana, 87 new development projects were presented between 2005 and 2010. 21 were met with overwhelming community opposition, yet 20 of the 21 were approved.

Other significant barriers to public participation exist: Inadequate notification, ineffective public hearings (public input sought at end vs. beginning of process), and constraints on city planners.

To produce The Rubber Stamp Process, OCCORD collected and tracked all 5,600 donations made to successful Mayoral and City Council candidates in Anaheim and Santa Ana between 2004 and 2010; reviewed occupational backgrounds and geographic locations of all planning commissioners in the two cities between 2000 and 2010; and based on 3,898 pages of City Council minutes, analyzed the City Council approval rate for all new development projects in those cities between 2005 and 2010. A copy of
The Rubber Stamp Process is available on OCCORD’s website at www.occord.org/rubberstamp.

The report offers four broad policy principles to remedy the current structural bias: (1) Encourage public participation early in the development process by raising public awareness and increasing outreach to neighborhoods before important decisions are made; (2) level the playing field by ensuring that all costs and benefits for a project are taken into account and increasing transparency in the decision-making process; (3) empower every neighborhood to have a voice in development decisions that affect its quality
of life; and (4) make elected and appointed officials more accountable to the communities they represent.

―The bias we observed goes beyond the actions of any single city, elected leader, or political party. It’s about who decides what happens to our communities: Out-of-town developers or the people who live and work there, said Nothoff. ―The solution is to give communities a real voice in the planning process.

Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development (OCCORD) is a nonprofit organization committed to economic development that benefits everyone who lives and works in Orange County’s diverse communities.

In the interest of full disclosure, it should be noted that failed Santa Ana Mayoral candidate Alfredo Amezcua is listed as a “Champion Funder” of this organization, according to OCCORD’s website. Moreover, their Board of Directors is totally dominated by organized labor, which is of course a special interest. Their Board also includes Amezcua backer Amin David, of the Anaheim Los Amigos. David is also listed as a funder or this organization. Lastly, their Staff is also dominated by labor representatives.

OCCORD is an advocate for Community Benefit Accords – these are compacts with developers that force the developers to spend thousands of dollars mollifying the OCCORD activists. Close to 100% of the CBAs advocated by OCCORD fail when developers realize they don’t have to listen to these unelected people.

The study fails to note that organized labor spent hundreds of thousands of dollars last year trying, fruitlessly, to elect John Leos to the Anaheim City Council – and labor figured heavily in Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido’s campaign as well. Labor money often is hidden in Independent Expenditures or arrives in the form of precinct walkers, which does not show up on campaign finance reports.

It is not illegal to accept campaign donations from sources outside of one’s city. That is a common practice. In fact Amezcua has started a PAC called the Santa Ana Coalition for Better Government, which is led by three of Amezcua’s allies who don’t live in Santa Ana, including Art Lomeli, who lives in wealthy Orange Park Acres and John Acosta, who lives in Anaheim.

The Planning Commissioners in Anaheim and Santa Ana are appointed by City Council representatives elected by the people who live in those cities. It doesn’t matter where they live. They serve at the pleasure of the Council Members who appoint them.

While Planning Commissions often approve development projects that face community opposition, the question one must ponder is whether that opposition consists of more than a few dozen people. The most hotly contested development in Santa Ana – the One Broadway Tower, was approved by the voters, yet today a handful of opponents continue to tie this project up in court – even though the project will provide almost three thousand good-paying jobs to union contractors. How ironic.

The people involved in OCCORD are also allied with the folks who are suing to stop the Transit District development in Santa Ana, although it would have provided a substantial amount of affordable housing. Again, how ironic, as affordable housing is supposedly one of OCCORD’s missions.

Alfredo Amezcua pulled together an amazing coalition at tonight’s community meeting

I attended a community meeting tonight at the Santa Ana Public Law Center. The meeting was moderated by Alfredo Amezcua, a local attorney and former college education board member, who also prepared the agenda. The organization he heads up is called the “Santa Ana Collaborative for Responsible Development.”

The main focus of this organization is the pending Station District development, which involved properties acquired by the City of Santa Ana over by the Train Station. How those properties get developed is this group’s main concern.

We heard tonight from Eric Altman of OCCORD and his colleague Becky Dennison. They told us about what they did with the Grand Ave. Project in Los Angeles. They met with the developer regularly and were able to work on what is called a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA). Continue reading→